i reckon it would b a gd idea. say u r in siam with a 7 and indonesia is a neutral country. ur oponents is about to take oz bonus next turn. instead of attacking the neutral country to block the final piece of the cont and therefore running the chance of losing several armies and not doing anything, why not just fort the grey? sounds gd to me. this would work particularly well in games with a 1v1 ratio eg 3 player game with 1 person out (especially if they deadbeated), trips, or 4p doubles.

Wisse wrote:dam than you forfit accendinetely 500 armys to that country and want that country then you have to kill 500 amrys, noway i disagree

Well, then, you'd just better be extra careful "forfeiting" those 500 armys. -- How the heck would you get so many, anyways; you'd have to be multiplaying not to get wiped out by the guy who trades in for 400, or 300, or 200.... Blaming a loss on an accident smacks of bad play (although I admit, I've done it before).

joeyjordison wrote:i reckon it would b a gd idea. say u r in siam with a 7 and indonesia is a neutral country. ur oponents is about to take oz bonus next turn. instead of attacking the neutral country to block the final piece of the cont and therefore running the chance of losing several armies and not doing anything, why not just fort the grey? sounds gd to me. this would work particularly well in games with a 1v1 ratio eg 3 player game with 1 person out (especially if they deadbeated), trips, or 4p doubles.

You see, now this is the kind of strategic deployment to a neutral territory that I'm thinking about! Also, how about you're playing World 2.0, and you own Australia, but the Australian Claim on Antarctica is owned by neutral....and the rest of Antarctica is crawling with hostiles, but you've got bigger fish to fry in Asia -- just drop some extra armies on the Australian Claim, and BAM, you've got a nice wall there. Or, you own Western Europe, your team-mate owns Scandinavia, and Moskva is neutral -- you could BOTH keep placing one or two armies each turn into Moskva to build a nice wall against threats from Turkey, Iran, Kazakhstan and Komi.

Oh, oh....or....say Blue ownz0rs Europe, but Red's got Asia on lock-down....but Moskva is neutral (World 2.0). Each turn, Blue would place armie(s) on Moskva to keep building a wall against Red, while Red does the same. Imagine -- a neutral territory continuously fortified by the players on either side -- the ultimate Conquer Club wall/buffer. Wow, these 24oz talls Buds really go to your head....

I know is great idea! Please to be implementing her now for great success!

NEUTRAL?! YOU BITCH HAD BETTER START RESPONDING RIGHT NOW, GET YOUR ASS IN ON THIS SECRET DIPLOMACY.

Foed.

Edit:Nice idea. Only the other day I thought about a similar suggestion, where I could deploy on another non-teammate to prevent him being eliminated and save my ass as well as his in an escalating game. Neutral only is better idea, bravo.

Attack Attack ATTACK!!! Bit of a war monger. Nothing for Defense, just Attack. I can see many useful reasons why a guy should be able to reinforce Neutrals.If they enter a territory, why can it not be for defense? You are more than welcome to attack them at any time.

Just think of a Poland game...everybody beefs up PAF...would make for a long game.If it helps you to understand...just think of them as your allies while you are placing units on them. And if you don't like it don't use it.Might not make these games so decisive. Make for some funny team games. Deploy units right in the middle of somebodies (soon to be)Controlled Region.Might add an interesting aspect to a nuclear games

Might be an OK option to have anyway.I think it would be a real benefit to the game.

waltero wrote:Attack Attack ATTACK!!! Bit of a war monger. Nothing for Defense, just Attack. I can see many useful reasons why a guy should be able to reinforce Neutrals.If they enter a territory, why can it not be for defense? You are more than welcome to attack them at any time.

Just think of a Poland game...everybody beefs up PAF...would make for a long game.If it helps you to understand...just think of them as your allies while you are placing units on them. And if you don't like it don't use it.Might not make these games so decisive. Make for some funny team games. Deploy units right in the middle of somebodies (soon to be)Controlled Region.Might add an interesting aspect to a nuclear games

Might be an OK option to have anyway.I think it would be a real benefit to the game.

if you want to defend, deploy on yourself. if you want to attack, deploy on yourself.

waltero wrote:Attack Attack ATTACK!!! Bit of a war monger. Nothing for Defense, just Attack. I can see many useful reasons why a guy should be able to reinforce Neutrals.If they enter a territory, why can it not be for defense? You are more than welcome to attack them at any time.

Just think of a Poland game...everybody beefs up PAF...would make for a long game.If it helps you to understand...just think of them as your allies while you are placing units on them. And if you don't like it don't use it.Might not make these games so decisive. Make for some funny team games. Deploy units right in the middle of somebodies (soon to be)Controlled Region.Might add an interesting aspect to a nuclear games

Might be an OK option to have anyway.I think it would be a real benefit to the game.

And what about FOW? Would you see where the neutrals are? And what if you want your troops back? If you can reinforce neutrals, why stop there and implement forting other players? Sorry, afwul idea.

Jdsizzleslice wrote:Seems kool, but I don't think this would necessarily be liked, because then anyone can fort. And what happens when you get into a Freestyle game? What dictates who forts the neutral?

It's an Idea! What in the world are you guys Talking about??? If you roll a 6 on one di while the territory has six neutral units on it and there is a full moon out and a black cat runs across the road, what will happen to those units you just dropped on a Neutral territory?The same thing that happens in all other Game boards.

You already ''can'' fort other players.Why would you see Neutral units in FOW games?''And what if you want your troops Back'' Well maybe you just declare it in game chat, So everybody can laugh at you and Call you a loser ;-PMaybe you don't want to defend yourself...but rather a territory that nobody controls as to keep or delay another player from Controlling it.

This is a basic game. I think the more options you have the better.It is good that Conquers Club took Risk and made it better...But it is still risk.If you want to keep it the same old game, Fine.

Not every board is the same. Some boards would probably do OK with this others might not.Could not remember, but I do think I recall a player that dropped a game, all his units go Neutral?

I don't have all the answers. I do have some Ideas.

I still think this game should utilize card play a bit more. A LOT MORE!

Right now it is only a (fun) game of Dice. Balance the game a bit with options and center on Strategy...Not a whole lot of Strategy in Risk.

All in all I do not think reinforcing neutrals will do much for the game.Won't know until you try.

''if you want to defend, deploy on yourself. if you want to attack, deploy on yourself''''they are your troops, if they enter another territory not controlled by yourself or your allies it is to attack''

Why limit your units,And the ability to implement new strategies

The more Neutrals interact with the game... then I think the players should be able to interact with the Neutrals.

Regenerating Neutrals for instance.Neutrals are not necessarily Neutral in some games.

Neutrals play a vital role in Kings court II. Trebuchet for one...are not Neutral!They are for enemy control (most of the time).

I haven't had the chance to experiment with them..but I do believe they revert back to normal at the beginning of the players turn (player who conquered it).Not sure if anything happens to it if it is not fully Conquered (partially weakened).

Good idea bad idea Don't really know. Is it Difficult to implement this in a game board? Don't see the harm in trying it out.Might give a person who has nothing to lose something to do in a game rather then up and leave.

Not sure It would be used or useful...but it would be nice to have the option

Last edited by waltero on Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.

waltero wrote:It's an Idea! What in the world are you guys Talking about??? If you roll a 6 on one di while the territory has six neutral units on it and there is a full moon out and a black cat runs across the road, what will happen to those units you just dropped on a Neutral territory?The same thing that happens in all other Game boards.

You already ''can'' fort other players.Why would you see Neutral units in FOW games?''And what if you want your troops Back'' Well maybe you just declare it in game chat, So everybody can laugh at you and Call you a loser ;-PMaybe you don't want to defend yourself...but rather a territory that nobody controls as to keep or delay another player from Controlling it.

This is a basic game. I think the more options you have the better.It is good that Conquers Club took Risk and made it better...But it is still risk.If you want to keep it the same old game, Fine.

Not every board is the same. Some boards would probably do OK with this others might not.Could not remember, but I do think I recall a player that dropped a game, all his units go Neutral?

I don't have all the answers. I do have some Ideas.

I still think this game should utilize card play a bit more. A LOT MORE!

Right now it is only a (fun) game of Dice. Balance the game a bit with options and center on Strategy...Not a whole lot of Strategy in Risk.

All in all I do not think reinforcing neutrals will do much for the game.Won't know until you try.

I'm just opposed to this idea. CC is already hard to get into when you are a NR with all those maps and features, I don't think reinforcing neutrals would help. And about the forting neutrals in FOW, I thought you also meant you could deploy on neutrals. Then you will have to see them.